Pennine MC Posted February 23, 2012 Share Posted February 23, 2012 . How different things could have been had they done one of the CK diagrams is open to conjecture, but the proof now should be how well (or not) the Bachmann Portholes sell being as they've announced their intention of doing the full complement of all 6 Porthole diagrams. I know I'll be wanting half a dozen of the CKs simply to justify the Hornby BTKs I bought, plus any more I'll be wanting to run with the other Portholes. I've said this before but I think Bachmann have pulled a blinder with this stock. It was widespread in its own right, even off its parent system, it's perfect for running in mixed formations with Hornby's equivalents, and it hits that 'post war prototype' spot - non-BR design but only marginally relevant to the designing company, an alternative to the all-pervading Mk1s, and serving BR for a good twenty years. Each chassis length most likely requires its own tooling, although there are a lot of common components, and the LMS had several lengths! 57' and 60' covered the bulk of them, but 50', 62' and 65' examples existed, plus the 12 wheelers on 68' and 69' chassis. If you're going to limit yourself to manufacturing two chassis lengths, which way do you go? 50' and 57' as Hornby did and lose out on the backbone of the LMS coaching fleet, or 57' and 60' and miss out one of the most common NPCS around...but Bachmann have had in their range for donkeys years (albeit of ancient Mainline heritage). I dont think they'll do a BG, given their own admittedly old but adequate model and Hornby's equivalent. The post below suggests the 57 and 60ft frames will suffice for what's planned: http://www.rmweb.co....post__p__613095 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Max Stafford Posted February 23, 2012 Share Posted February 23, 2012 Now that Hornby have parked firmly on the Eastern non-gangwayed types, perhaps this will be a good moment for Bachmann to secure the LMS equivalent niche. Loco-wise as I've probably stated before, I'm utterly convinced that we will see a J21 announced along with a BR 78xxx. Beyond that, all bets are off in my book since the completely bushwhacked me with last year's loco announcements. Wagon wise, I'm rather hoping that a grain wagon will break cover but I'll offer the 21t hopper and 35t VB tank as rank outsiders! Dave. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Charlie Posted February 24, 2012 Share Posted February 24, 2012 Snip...I know the Bachmann A4 has been warmed over this year, but what Pacifics haven't been done yet that would fit into Bachmann's stable? Only the Thompson Pacifics stand out bar the Merchant Navy engines, and it's arguable that only the A2/3 stands any chance of being made RTR. Without wishing to re-open the whole duplication/repetition debate, I think this shows the the Big famous green policy is now at an end. Short of the LMS "Princess Royal" (I think) the original WC/BoB and the MN's, all the big classes are covered with the more modern chassis, fixed catrazzi truck etc. All of which are currently in the Hornby stable. Looking at what they've produced recently Bachmann do seem to have moved onto the big freight 2-8-0's (7f, O4, WD) or the much more numerous 0-6-0's (3f, C class) and 4-4-0's (Dukedog, Compound, CoT). Not only are the last two under-represented, 5 and 7 compared to 9 pacific examples, but there's such a vast range of models that duplication is very unlikely giving them free choice. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ozexpatriate Posted February 24, 2012 Share Posted February 24, 2012 Must say I'm bemused by the continual mentions of an unrebuilt sorry, original MN. Is it just longingly wanting a gap filled, because I cant see the logic at all. They dont have any sort of chassis or other existing bits available (AFAIK), whereas Hornby do, and could easily pip them if they wanted to. The A2 was announced 2008, came in 2011. They may yet have another in the pipeline, but a Merchant Navy? It would literally take Hornby just the bodyshell of loco and tender as a major component to tool up ... <snip> ... but it doesn't stand to reason that Bachmann will do one. I quite agree with both of you. As desireable as the as-built MN is*, it doesn't really feel like Bachmann Branchline's cup of tea right now. * It's not about filling a gap, it's a big green named novelty. They look nice. There are certainly some 'serious' fanciers of Southern mainline metals who are focused on the 1940s, but likely not legions of them. Nevertheless, this seems to be a popular choice, perhaps the kind of thing that lives in a cabinet and has an occasional day out as a special. Why not? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
S.A.C Martin Posted February 24, 2012 Share Posted February 24, 2012 Without wishing to re-open the whole duplication/repetition debate, I think this shows the the Big famous green policy is now at an end. Short of the LMS "Princess Royal" (I think) the original WC/BoB and the MN's, all the big classes are covered with the more modern chassis, fixed catrazzi truck etc. All of which are currently in the Hornby stable. Bar the Peppercorn A1s and A2s, accepted of course. But the A2s only numbered 15, I hear a few say...as did the Thompson A2/3s. You can't model post 1948 British Railways Eastern Region without more of the latter and a few of the former. Some might say based on allocation that the A2/3s presented more of the ex-LNER lines as opposed the predominantly Scottish A2s. But that's a by the by, as I agree with you to an extent. Looking at what they've produced recently Bachmann do seem to have moved onto the big freight 2-8-0's (7f, O4, WD) or the much more numerous 0-6-0's (3f, C class) and 4-4-0's (Dukedog, Compound, CoT). Not only are the last two under-represented, 5 and 7 compared to 9 pacific examples, but there's such a vast range of models that duplication is very unlikely giving them free choice. True enough, but I suspect the "named" asset is still going to factor and it's for that reason I keep coming back to the ROD tender which, although inaccurate to be a true GCR tender, hasn't stopped Bachmann selling it as one and perhaps putting it behind a D10/11 isn't far off. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
robmcg Posted February 24, 2012 Share Posted February 24, 2012 Now that Hornby have parked firmly on the Eastern non-gangwayed types, perhaps this will be a good moment for Bachmann to secure the LMS equivalent niche. Loco-wise as I've probably stated before, I'm utterly convinced that we will see a J21 announced along with a BR 78xxx. Beyond that, all bets are off in my book since the completely bushwhacked me with last year's loco announcements. Wagon wise, I'm rather hoping that a grain wagon will break cover but I'll offer the 21t hopper and 35t VB tank as rank outsiders! Dave. Regardless of the need for carriages, Bachmann certainly have done well recently in LMS engines. ...and in the spirit of Midland double-heading, and the 'do we need new engines anyway?' Midland school of though... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThaneofFife Posted February 24, 2012 Share Posted February 24, 2012 A suitable candidate for the Shawplan Laserglaze products, methinks... Or Southern Pride. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
davidw Posted February 24, 2012 Share Posted February 24, 2012 Never available R-T-R Thompson A2 derivatives must be in the sights of Bachmann or Hornby. The A2/3 in particular looks a very muscular machine. I'm not sure if we'll see it this year though. I still hope the V2 body is properly retooled, reports of the new A4 and B1 are that the new mechanisims are exceptionally smooth, and the V2 I'm sure will be no exception. But the body of the V2 is let down so badly, that comments requesting Hornby have a crack at it are now heard. I can't imagine Bachmann selling many A4's or B1's, to the more discerning modeller. Looking through the polls for 2011 for ER modellers a K1, J type 0-6-0 of some description as would a 4-4-0 be on the cards? I'd love to see retooled Thompson gangwayed stock and 1928 Pullmans but all this could be a vain hope. Only when the 14/15 March comes will we see what curve ball Bachmann throw our way. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fenman Posted February 24, 2012 Share Posted February 24, 2012 Bar the Peppercorn A1s and A2s, accepted of course. But the A2s only numbered 15, I hear a few say...as did the Thompson A2/3s. You can't model post 1948 British Railways Eastern Region without more of the latter and a few of the former. You can, you know - not many "A"s were seen on the M&GN lines, for instance... Paul Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Max Stafford Posted February 24, 2012 Share Posted February 24, 2012 True, but if you're doing the main lines, the big Thompsons were pretty hard to miss. A K1 is a near certainty now, but I reckon that's coming from Hornby when you look at their philosophy with the L1 and B1. Plenty of common parts there already. Hoping for something Scottish before long. Dave. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
45568 Posted February 24, 2012 Share Posted February 24, 2012 True, but if you're doing the main lines, the big Thompsons were pretty hard to miss. A K1 is a near certainty now, but I reckon that's coming from Hornby when you look at their philosophy with the L1 and K1. Plenty of common parts there already. Hoping for something Scottish before long. Dave. I reckon a fully detailed J36 is on the cards, there seem to be a couple on Ebay!!! :angel: Cheers, Peter c. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
iL Dottore Posted February 24, 2012 Share Posted February 24, 2012 I have it on good authority that Bachmann are doing a 92XX.... ..... in pink! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Metr0Land Posted February 24, 2012 RMweb Gold Share Posted February 24, 2012 I have it on good authority that Bachmann are doing a 92XX.... ..... in pink! Maybe a trial run for one of your scientific reviews? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Max Stafford Posted February 24, 2012 Share Posted February 24, 2012 You might think that. I couldn't possibly comment... ;-) Dave. I reckon a fully detailed J36 is on the cards, there seem to be a couple on Ebay!!! :angel: Cheers, Peter c. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
coachmann Posted February 24, 2012 Share Posted February 24, 2012 I wonder if Hornby knows something we don't when they appear to be making a pre-emptive strike by putting its loco-drive LMS 4F 0-6-0 on dealers shelves just prior to Bachmann making its Spring announcements. The blurb I've read today says : Please note that this model is much improved compared to previous versions and is built around a new chassis as well as being loco drive rather than tender drive, it also includes multiple pickups for super smooth running! Mmmm...It's a lot more expensive than Bachmanns scale model of the smaller 3F, but as Bachmanns' 4F (assuming they were doing one) won't be in the shops for months, Hornby will have swept up the money! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
davidw Posted February 24, 2012 Share Posted February 24, 2012 I wonder if Hornby knows something we don't when they appear to be making a pre-emptive strike by putting its loco-drive LMS 4F 0-6-0 on dealers shelves just prior to Bachmann making its Spring announcements. The blurb I've read today says : Please note that this model is much improved compared to previous versions and is built around a new chassis as well as being loco drive rather than tender drive, it also includes multiple pickups for super smooth running! Mmmm...It's a lot more expensive than Bachmanns scale model of the smaller 3F, but as Bachmanns' 4F (assuming they were doing one) won't be in the shops for months, Hornby will have swept up the money! By the tone of your posting I'd swear you thought Hornby and Bachmann were in competition! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Porco Rosso Posted February 24, 2012 Share Posted February 24, 2012 By the tone of your posting I'd swear you thought Hornby and Bachmann were in competition! Sounds more like at war than in competition! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
micklner Posted February 24, 2012 Share Posted February 24, 2012 A2/3 is a obvious choice. The Tender is done and 90% of the body and chassis is straight of the existing A2 . Nice names and liveries and the recent conversions show that it has no problems going around curves either. Outsiders J21 or J27 or a Q6 . I expect another version of the O4 stable too , hopefully they will modify the tender at the same time !!. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold MikeParkin65 Posted February 24, 2012 RMweb Gold Share Posted February 24, 2012 I think they might surprise us with an Ivatt Duchess. It would fit in with the existing and already announced range (go well with 10000\100001 and the porthole stock) and would sell to those who already have the Hornby Stanier Duchess. 46256 carried four of the five Duchess liveries (LMS black, BR blue, BR green (both early and late crest and BR maroon) then their is 46257. And depending on sales Bachmann could then look at using the chassis at least for a Stanier Duchess. I think both of the Hornby LMS pacifics are showing their age and are ripe for replacement. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
34theletterbetweenB&D Posted February 25, 2012 Share Posted February 25, 2012 That would put a hole in Bachmann's regularly mentioned policy of not wanting to duplicate anything unless they can make a significant improvement on what is already available. There is clear room to improve the Duchess, Princess, King, among the dated larger named types in Hornby's range, but is the gap big enough? None of these are like the 9F (the last major incursion into Hornbyland) where the Hornby model was grossly inaccurate in several respects, threadbare below the footplate, still cursed with tender drive, and Hornby had never bothered with the most important and numerous variant. That was a fair sized opportunity gap to close in producing a markedly better model. Personally, I must admit to not being greatly worked up over the Bachmann announcement. They seem to have got the idea that good models of the more numerous classes among the 'lesser lights', common coaches and wagons, are the way ahead. Every year they announce items of this sort which have me thinking 'useful, very useful' and thus I am simply looking forward to being pleasantly surprised by more in this vein. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Southernman46 Posted February 25, 2012 Share Posted February 25, 2012 Prototype APT!!!!!! - it came to me in a dream................ Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold griffgriff Posted February 25, 2012 RMweb Gold Share Posted February 25, 2012 I had a dream last night too... but I'm pretty sure that we will find Bachmann unconnected Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
autocoach Posted February 25, 2012 Share Posted February 25, 2012 The froth is getting very light and foamy.....and wishlisty washy.... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Armchair Modeller Posted February 25, 2012 Share Posted February 25, 2012 Never mind only 2 weeks or so before all our dreams are dashed - or prove true. Then, after a few weeks of moaning or celebration we can start all over again with a 2013 thread! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Max Stafford Posted February 26, 2012 Share Posted February 26, 2012 I like wishy-washy froth. It doesn't spill out all over the important stuff... Dave. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.